Max Mosley, president of Formula One's ruling body, told a London court today there were no Nazi overtones in excerpts of a sex video he appears in published by the U.K. News of the World newspaper.

Mosley, 68, is suing the British tabloid for saying he and the women in the video were dressed as concentration camp guards and prisoners. Mosley testified on the first day of the trial today in London that there weren't any Nazi elements during the sadomasochistic sex depicted on the tape.

``Never. Absolutely not,'' Mosley said. ``I can think of few things moreun-erotic than Nazi role play.''

A lawyer for News of the World, Mark Warby, said the story was legitimate and in the public interest given that whipping or beating a person is a criminal offense regardless of whether they consent. Mosley said he was whipped until he bled.

Society ``draws a line at causing people injury for the purpose of sexual gratification,'' Warby said. ``S&M doesn't promote human dignity,it demeans it.''

Just because the sexual activity was behind closed doors doesn't guarantee it was a private act under the European Convention on Human Rights, Warby said. Under questioning this afternoon, Mosley agreed that the group were dressed up as prisoners and that one woman wore a uniform. He denied the uniform was German military.

Former porn stars, sex gurus, belly dancers and performers make an appearance at this event, filled with drag and burlesque shows, orgasm workshops, fetishism and more. The festival also includes an erotic arts exhibit at Load Of Fun Studios, running through July.

Friday is dedicated to "before the edge" art: Things that are more playful, teasing and implicitly sexual. This includes drag and burlesque shows, as well as body painting and a human buffet. (To clarify, food is served on humans, not made of humans.)

Saturday, aims to go "after the edge," with events leaning toward moresexually explicit topics, such as fetishism and BDSM. Special guests such as bondage and fetish model Klawdya Rothschild, pornography director and photographer Julie Simone and others will be on hand.

"My goal was not to redraw the boundaries between sexual differences, [or] decide what belongs [in eroticism] and what doesn't," said festival sponsor and Load Of Fun Studios curator Suzannah Gerber. "My standpoint was just to make this festival as erotic and eclectic as possible."

When CBS entertainment president Nina Tassler said in late 2006 that the network was "going to throw out the rule book," she wasn't kidding.In case anybody was wondering just what rules she was talking about, the wait is over. On June 5, CBS officially joined the marriage deconstruction movement when it premiered Swingtown-an edgy sitcom that eviscerates marriage in our postmodern culture.

Swingtown, named in part for the wife-swapping that occurs, features open marriage and group sex as normal. Today's cultural elite hope Swingtown, which also refers to the mid-70s as a watershed when the cultural and moral tide turned, serves as a catalyst to turn the tide again.

Gay marriage revolutionaries, vangards of marriage deconstruction, claim they're not attacking marriage but rather just seeking the same freedom that everyone else has. Perhaps Swingtown could serve as the poster city for that idea. It's no coincidence that in a scene of a wild July 4th party, complete with drugs and group sex, one woman extols the grandiosity of open marriage trying to convince her newfound friend that "opening our relationship was the best thing that ever happened." Partygoers sang the National Anthem, and then acted as though lavishing the marital benefits of one's spouse to another is just as American as apple pie.

Swingtown is made-up. But the legal fiction recently imposed by the California high court that marriage is whatever you want it to be has real consequences for our culture. Without the opposite sex requirement of marriage, there's no longer a logical basis against the number of participants (polygamy,) open marriage (polyamory), and blood restrictions (adult incest).

California's Supreme Four steamrolled the democratic process and, along with it, the self-evident truths that gender differences matter and contribute to healthy marriage; that children deserve to have their biological mothers and fathers raising them in the same home; and that man-woman marriage is foundational to social stability.

[continued]

To read this entire article, go to:http://www.wkyx.com/local-news-details.asp?NewsID=6394To respond, write to:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
and
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

In Madison, It's Easy to Be Kinky: The Communityby John MendelssohnDane101.comJuly 2, 2008

Women wanting to be owned by men occupy only one of innumerable niches in the world of kink, of course. For every woman who shares Frances's and Hannah's predilection, there's a man who wants no less avidly to surrendercompletely to a woman, or at least be "forced" to put on an item of herintimate apparel and then cruelly ridiculed for having done so, or one who wants to be spanked or flogged. There are men who ask only that their lovers wear seamed stockings and high heels in the bedroom for them, and others who require girdles, opera gloves, garish red lipstick, and false eyelashes too, and others who ask that their lovers also regulate their intake of oxygen. Just as there are women who... are thrilled to be treated almost like pets, there are other women who delight in slipping into gleaming latex catsuits and imperiously leading their naked spouses, forbidden to address them as anything other than Goddess, or at all, around on leashes.

How, if these people are telling the truth, does it make sense to condemn as sordid or even pathological their erotic interactions while respecting the homosexuality of their siblings or neighbors, as every enlightened person has come to the past 30 years?

Having earlier lived in Iowa and Mexico, among less picturesque locales, Mistress Jade -- Madison's go-to gal for submissive men whose wives or girlfriends won't or can't play ball -- came to Madison seven years ago because Chicago was too big and Madison was where her mother had grown up. A virgin until age 19, if a scoffer at erotic taboos from earliest pubescence, she is the co-proprietress, according to her Website, of The Madison Dungeon, though such a place exists only in imagination. Local fire and safety law preclude running an establishment in which clients are routinely tied up; there are zoning laws to consider.

In a typical month, she'll do eight outcall sessions in the homes or motel rooms of a clientele that, notwithstanding the classic conception of submissive men as captains of industry yearning to relinquish power, comprises a vast array of walks of life. "Put them all in the same small town," she muses, "and only a couple would ever run into each other."Along with movers and shakers, she also sees Joe Sixpacks who service furnaces, who recondition carburetors. All they have in common is having filled out a detailed questionnaire, the details of which Her Nibs entrusts to an attorney for safekeeping.

Barry:Today's question focuses on whether obscenity laws should continue to exist in modern American society. To put this question in its proper perspective, one must understand the relatively narrow scope of these laws. Under a 1st Amendment test established by the U.S. Supreme Court known as the Miller test (from the 1973 case Miller vs. California), only sexually explicit materials that are designed to appeal to a morbid interest in things sexual and are depicted in an extremely offensive way -- all as determined by an "average" person of a given community -- canbe made illegal by obscenity laws. Moreover, even works that meet these criteria but also possess serious artistic or literary value cannot be deemed obscene (such as a sex magazine with articles). Finally, works that qualify for obscene treatment cannot be criminalized in the home (private possession is legal). It is mainly the public sale, distribution or exhibition of such materials that can be prohibited.

In short, obscenity laws generally target commercial distributors of extreme pornography. And even there, obscenity prosecutions are rare because of the difficulties prosecutors encounter in proving that materials meet the Miller standards. One study found that materials that have been deemed obscene by juries or judges usually contain explicit depictions of sex acts involving human excretion, sex with human corpses or live animals, acts of incest or violent, forced sex.

Because today's question asks us to assume that such extreme materials are made without violating any laws (an assumption that would probably falter in the real world), we must inquire whether even simulated depictions of such acts should qualify for illegal treatment when they are publicly distributed or exhibited. In other words, the standard way of putting the question usually asks: "If no one is harmed by this stuff and someone wants it, who is the government to say that he or she can't have it?"

John:It does not matter to you that pornography is now almost exclusively consumed in the privacy of one's own home. In fact, to me this is not the issue. The issue is about porn that is "extremely offensive." Some individuals do not take offense to extreme porn, and those individuals are protected by the Constitution. No one should be subject to the whims of a group or "community" that does not like what you look at. And what is wrong with being extreme? In today's culture, being extreme is revered. It is the people on the extreme who move the world forward, who experiment and find new ways of living. Technology has made extreme changes in our lives. If we are not open-minded to change, we stagnate and wallow in sanctimonious righteousness about the world.

From a legal standpoint, this comes down to your view of human nature and society. Is it right, ethical or moral for one group of people to control the thoughts of another group? Indeed, it is the thoughts that erotic images arouse in the viewer's mind that those who would assume the power to control others have a problem with. Just remember that if you would assume such power, Barry, you personally are responsible for arresting me because I sold images you didn't like. This is exactly what you allowed to happen when I was indicted on nine counts of obscenity by the Department of Justice last April.

Barry, your point is that people must be forced to not think things that you don't like, and for that you'd have me put in jail. Your comment thatit "seems" to you that viewing images "to obtain sexual pleasure cannot be the healthiest way of experiencing sex" seems not a good enough reason to imprison me for 39 years. In fact, using a proper concept of morality based on individual rights, it is you and those who would put me in jail when I did not infringe on anyone's rights who are behaving immorally.

All four men remain free on bond until their Aug. 11 sentencing hearing before Circuit Judge Ron Swanson. Each defendant left the courthouse without comment.

"Ray Guhn Productions" featured a Web site with more than 5,000 subscribers who could view films featuring group sex and other acts for $30 a month.

The company made $10 million in its five years of operation, prosecutors said.

The films were made at homes throughout Pensacola and Pace; at least five hotels in Pensacola; along Interstate 10 and Interstate 110; in wooded areas and in other public places.

Tuesday's pleas helped attorneys avoid a three-week obscenity trial that was expected to begin Monday with jury selection at the Santa Rosa County Courthouse.

Assistant State Attorney Russ Edgar prosecuted the two-year-old case that began with arrests in summer 2006.

The veteran prosecutor heralded Tuesday's pleas as a major victory against obscenity in the Panhandle and the state of Florida.

"We have this problem statewide. I hope prosecutors will take our lead and enforce our law," he said.

But McCowen's attorney thought otherwise.

Altamonte Springs attorney Lawrence Walters, one of McCowen's three attorneys, is known for representing clients in the adult-entertainment industry. He said that he doesn't expect Tuesday's outcome to result in a rash of charges filed by Florida prosecutors.

"There was no finding of obscenity by a jury," Walters said. "Themajority of the state attorneys in this state have come to recognize that the communities don't want publishers sent to jail for sexual expression."

To prove that material is obscene, and not protected by the First Amendment, it has to fall below the community standards. In this case, that standard is defined by the 1st Judicial Circuit of Florida.

The good thing about this new series is that you know in the first two minutes whether or not you are the audience the show is looking for. All you have to do is ask yourself, "Am I interested in seeing a man forced to go down on a dildo being worn by a dominatrix?" If the answer is yes, keep reading.

The premise of the show is quite simple. Eric Schaeffer wrote a book about being single and trying to find love. When he went on his book tour he decided to make stops along the way, talk to different people about love and relationships and film it all for this documentary.

The show is rife with too much information. I'm sure Schaeffer finds a lot of humor in his stories about masturbation and being anally violated but for me it's sort of like having a friend who you've known for a short while tell you something personal you never wanted to know, like he enjoys being anally violated.

Another annoying part of the show are the multiple interviews Eric has with his longtime dominatrix. I suppose if I had an interest in S&M, I might like hearing her talk about their activities but while I enjoy many colors of the sexual rainbow, that particular shade doesn't appeal to me, Moreover, I don't have much interest in the sexual habits of a guy as desperate as Eric Schaeffer, therefore those conversations are of no value to me.

What's Obscene? Google Could Have an Answerby Matt RichtelNew York TimesJune 23, 2008

Judges and jurors who must decide whether sexually explicit material is obscene are asked to use a local yardstick: does the material violate community standards?

That is often a tricky question because there is no simple, concrete way to gauge a community's tastes and values.

The Internet may be changing that. In a novel approach, the defense in an obscenity trial in Florida plans to use publicly accessible Google search data to try to persuade jurors that their neighbors have broader interests than they might have thought.

In the trial of a pornographic Web site operator, the defense plans to show that residents of Pensacola are more likely to use Google to search for terms like "orgy" than for "apple pie" or "watermelon".The publicly accessible data is vague in that it does not specify how many people are searching for the terms, just their relative popularity over time. But the defense lawyer, Lawrence Walters, is arguing that the evidence is sufficient to demonstrate that interest in the sexual subjects exceeds that of more mainstream topics b and that by extension, the sexual material distributed by his client is not outside the norm.

It is not clear that the approach will succeed. The Florida state prosecutor in the case, which is scheduled for trial July 1, said the search data may not be relevant because the volume of Internet searches is not necessarily an indication of, or proxy for, a community's values.

But the tactic is another example of the value of data collected by Internet companies like Google, both from a commercial standpoint and as a window into the thoughts, interests and desires of their users.

"Time and time again you'll have jurors sitting on a jury panel who willcondemn material that they routinely consume in private", said Mr. Walters, the defense lawyer. Using the Internet data, "we can show how people really think and feel and act in their own homes, which, parenthetically, is where this material was intended to be viewed", he added.

Mr. Walters last week also served Google with a subpoena seeking more specific search data, including the number of searches for certain sexual topics done by local residents. A Google spokesman said the company was reviewing the subpoena.

Mr. Walters is defending Clinton Raymond McCowen, who is facing charges that he created and distributed obscene material through a Web site based in Florida. The charges include racketeering and prostitution, but Mr. Walters said the prosecution's case fundamentally relies on proving that the material on the site is obscene.

Such cases are a relative rarity this decade. In the last eight years, the Justice Department has brought roughly 15 obscenity cases that have not involved child pornography, compared with 75 during the Reagan and first Bush administrations, according to Jeffrey J. Douglas, chairman emeritus of the First Amendment Lawyers Association. (There have been hundreds involving child pornography.) Prosecutions at the state level have followed a similar arc.

Feedback letters are an effective way to convey a positive image of alternate sexual practices such as SM, swinging, or polyamory. You can help to correct negative social myths and misconceptions about these types of practices. These letters help achieve the advocacy goals of the NCSF.

Please alert us to positive, negative or neutral stories about SM, swinging and polyamory at
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
. Comments to the editor of this Update may be sent to
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
.